Re: My PACER post for VoxPopuLII

[Carl Malamud <xxxx@media.org>]

ok. thanks. just keep me in the loop. that's one of the things the judges 
always ask me about.

On Feb 1, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Aaron Swartz wrote:

> the vast majority of it is whiteout, but it is in my to-scan pile. the
> only other remotely substantive thing I can think of were some
> grumbles about getting Amazon to comply with the grand jury subpoena
> to get my IP (and some concomitant confusion about AWS -- one DOJ
> lawyer says "Isn't that a backup service?")
> 
> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Carl Malamud <xxxxxxx@media.org> wrote:
>> I don't want to publish them, I'd like to read them to see what they say.
>> 
>> If you guys are going to keep dining out on this story, I think it is only 
>> fair that you share what you find out about the feds.  The reports from DOJ 
>> attorneys are especially relevant.
>> 
>> On Feb 1, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>> 
>>> i'll try to get the FOIA docs scanned at some point, but i'm trying to
>>> lie low at the moment
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Stephen Schultze <xxxxxxx@princeton.edu> wrote:
>>>> Yeah, they know about me because the fucking NYT published my name even
>>>> though I asked them not to.
>>>> 
>>>> What a waste of federal resources.
>>>> 
>>>> Nice FOIA work Aaron.
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 1, 2011, at 3:04 PM, Carl Malamud wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> they still claim they have no file on me in response to my foia request.
>>>>> 
>>>>> can I see your foia results?
>>>>> 
>>>>> thanks!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Carl
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 1, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I should note that last week I got some FOIA documents from DOJ where
>>>>>> they suggest that Schultze was my co-conspirator. (They redact his
>>>>>> name but they describe him as a guy who gave a talk to the Berkman
>>>>>> Center about how PACER should be free and note that I live nearby the
>>>>>> Center -- so DOJ figured out what the FBI didn't. Intergovernmental
>>>>>> uncoordination wins again!)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> DOJ Attorney: "I would venture to guess that the PACER compromise was
>>>>>> conceived and carried out by Swartz and [REDACTED] in furtherance of
>>>>>> the open access to documents projects that both are involved in. I
>>>>>> wouldn't be shocked if they freely admitted they did it and asserted
>>>>>> some sort of defense based on their belief that government document
>>>>>> should be available free of charge and/or that they merely automated
>>>>>> the free PACER access being provided by the US Courts."
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> and then, months later:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> DOJ Attorney: "We've had several fairly lengthy discussions internally
>>>>>> here at CCIPS over the last few days re the PACER investigation. Our
>>>>>> assessment, based on what we know at this point, is that this doesn't
>>>>>> seem like a great case to pursue with a full investigative effort and
>>>>>> an eye towards prosecution. There are a number of reasons fpr that
>>>>>> assessment and some alternatives for addressing the conduct..."
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> FWIW, I've never named anyone else who was involved in what I did, but
>>>>>> let me know if you want to take credit.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Steve Schultze <xxxxxxx@princeton.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hey, I've written a post about PACER for VoxPopuLII.  I basically tell
>>>>>>> the history of the fight to remove the paywall.  I describe some of our
>>>>>>> early antics, so I wanted to run it by you before it goes live.  Let me 
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> if anything should be censored, or if I'm missing anything important.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> For some reason the hyperlinks didn't come through on the PDF, but there
>>>>>>> are a bunch of them.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>